I think it’s become clear Cuccinelli won’t win. He’s down nearly 10 points. The shutdown was the final nail in his coffin.

I’m a huge fan of Ron and a lesser one of Rand, but I wish the elder Paul had kept quiet on this one. If for no other reason then that Cuccinelli’s campaign was most responsible for its dirty tricks of keeping Sarvis out of the debates. That to me robbed any chance of the Republican getting my support in this race. As someone who was also excluded from debates and generally marginalized by the establishment, Ron Paul should have thought twice about endorsing a candidate who was willing to use the same dirty tricks.

I can’t stand Ron Paul. I really think he puts party before principle more often than his die hard supporters admit. When he does things like this he either seems to defeat his own ideas or he exposes himself as more of a mainstream republican than he’d like us to think of him as.

Either way, he’s really just a career republican politician who’s managed to get some time in the spotlight by being vocal about some select issues that are controversial within mainstream American politics.

What people like Paul essentially do is help maintain the political status quo in terms of party affiliation by successfully selling their party as being a “big tent”.

Figures like Paul and Dennis Kucinich completely and willingly negate the efforts of the Ralph Naders and (sorry Warren) Gary Johnsons of the world. It’s very frustrating for someone who believes American politics will be better served when more parties are considered relevant.

I can’t say that I agree with Ron here, but I can see why he is doing it – to build support in the GOP for Rand Paul running for the GOP’s Presidential nomination in 2016.

I’m not necessarily opposed to endorsing a candidate who is running under the Republican Party banner, or any other banner for that matter, however, they’d have to meet a certain litmus test, and I don’t see Cuccinelli as passing that test, even if he’s done a few good things here and there, I don’t see it as enough to make up for his shortcomings, especially when there is a much better candidate in the race in Robert Sarvis.

The two choices I see in this race are to either vote for Robert Sarvis or to not bother voting.

Ron Paul has a long history of endorsing bad candidates. It’s the one thing about him that I really dislike. But hey, nobody’s perfect, and I still greatly prefer someone who takes strong, principled libertarian positions on 95% of the issues, as opposed to someone like Gary Johnson or Jim Gray, who seem uncomfortable taking any position that hasn’t been endorsed by CATO, or some other DC think tank.

“Ron Paul is a Republican Congressmean, RAND Paul is a Republican.
Duh? HOW in hell can you be surprised?
Ron Paul, for a Republican is pretty righteous. but, HE IS A REPUBLICAN
What is it about this that you can’t seem to understand.”

“Assuming that RP did this as a setup for Cuccinelli to support Rand in 16, I really have to wonder whether that will work EVEN IF Cuccinelli wins.”

Exactly. I have the same problem with Rand Paul supporting Mitch McConnell. As soon as Mitch wins his primary in 2014, he’ll drop Rand like a hot potato.

Rand’s chances for Prez would be enhanced far more if he recruited and supported a Liberty/Tea-Party candidate to knock Mitch out in a primary. He should be building up the liberty movement within the GOP, not cutting deals with big government Republican insiders.

That is a very good analysis, Warren wredlich. I am disappointed and saddened by Ron Paul’s endorsement of Cuccinelli. He should have just kept quiet. Silence is golden, as former Sen. Harry Byrd of Virginia used to say about why he didn’t endorse Democrat Party Presidential candidates.

Even though the Cooch and his minions are having fun rubbing this into our faces, they don’t realize that this is too little too late, the Cooch’s goose is still cooked either way and this RP endorsement won’t be his game changer.

If Ron Paul is endorsing Cuccinelli to get support for Rand Paul, it’s actually better if Cuccinelli loses. If he wins, the Pauls are saddled with questions about whatever screwed up stuff he does for the next two years. If he loses, they just get credit for supporting the Republican Party in a tough, hard-fought race … and Cuccinelli has plenty of time to get out and stump for Rand.

Completely done with Ron & Rand Paul. They’ve both betrayed the liberty movement in many ways. If Rand does end up winning the GOP nomination, I will do everything in my power to make sure he loses in the general.

I believe that Ron and Rand are not ready to lead the disintegration of the Republican party. But I think the disintegration is going to happen none the less. The religious right is not going to let Rand or Ted Cruz get the nomination for President in 2016 the Libertarian right is going to have to decide whether to keep with the Republican party or walk away. I believe that in Virginia we are starting to see them walk away.

They have many good aspects, especially Ron, but this is not one of them.

If Rand does end up winning the GOP nomination

Won’t happen. Since the 1940s Republican presidential nominees have always been: past runner up for the nomination, past VP or VP candidate, victorious war general or Bush family member. Rand is not any of those. Furthermore, he pisses off too many Republicans.

I will do everything in my power to make sure he loses in the general.

Can’t say that I prefer Hillary Clinton. I would be working more to increase the LP total, provided the LP candidate does not suck, and less to game who wins between the Democrats and Republicans.

The Paul’s are all about themselves and are no different than any other politician. They feed off of a constituency while regularly betraying that same group of people. I would put Ron Paul right up there with Al Sharpton in that regard.

To me, this endorsement is no surprise. But Paul’s endorsement is meaningless. What did it do for Baldwin? Zilch.

I agree that it won’t make any difference in the outcome. It might sway a few die-hard Ron Paul fanatics, but probably very few. Most Ron Paul supporters only support him because of his issue stands, or perceived issue stands. When he makes an endorsement of a candidate that doesn’t hold those positions, they don’t follow him over the cliff.

As for Baldwin, he may have picked up perhaps 50,000 votes nationwide due to Ron Paul’s endorsement. It didn’t propel him to the next level, but it may have moved him to, relatively, the upper tier of Constitution Party presidential nominees historically. On the other hand, many of the Ron Paul supporters who voted for Baldwin may well have come to that conclusion even if Ron Paul made no endorsement. Some of the most die hard Ron Paul supporters persisted in writing in Ron Paul, even though it did not count in most states. So, Baldwin did not get those votes.

I get the impression that Ron Paul endorses almost any candidate that asks him for an endorsement. In 1992 I was the Libertarian candidate for Congress in California’s 43rd District. I wrote to Ron Paul asking for an endorsement, reminding him I had been County Coordinator for his campaign in 1988, and he sent me a nice letter of endorsement.

It is likely that Ken Cuccinelli solicited an endorsement from Ron Paul because of his worry about losing votes to Robert Sarvis, the Libertarian candidate.

The one big issue Ron Paul mentions in endorsing Cuccinelli is the lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act. If anything, that lawsuit backfired. Justice Roberts may have had issues with the ACA, but he did not want to put the court in the position of overturning a major law passed by Congress, so he voted against declaring it unconstitutional. Supporters of Obamacare have since used the court decision to argue against critics who continue to point out the unconstitutional features of ACA.

I get the impression that Ron Paul endorses almost any candidate that asks him for an endorsement. In 1992 I was the Libertarian candidate for Congress in California’s 43rd District. I wrote to Ron Paul asking for an endorsement, reminding him I had been County Coordinator for his campaign in 1988, and he sent me a nice letter of endorsement.

If so, then the Sarvis campaign should have asked for an endorsement, as should every LP campaign from here on out.

“Nothing can save Cuccinelli at this point. Well, maybe if McAuliffe is found in bed with a dead 14 year old boy. Maybe.”

There, finally fixed.

Of course, if McAuliffe were to mysteriously die while riding in the trunk of Cuccinelli’s car the night before the election……..

But, Ron Paul needs to go fight his traditionalist culture war some place other than Virginia or has he moved to Virginia to be close to the beltway? If not, he can battle against queers and abortions in Texas or just stick to fighting the Imperial Empire.

Does Ron Paul even know who Rob Sarvis is and that Rob Sarvis is in the race? I think that it is possible that he does not.

A woman by the name of Donna Holt, who is apparently the head of Campaign for Liberty in Virginia, urged Ron Paul to endorse Cuccinelli. It could have gone some like, “Hey Dr. Paul, we’ve got a candidate running for Governor of Virginia who fought against Obamacare and who is for smaller government. Could you give him an endorsement?” and he was like, “Yeah, sure.”

Regardless of how it happened, I do not agree with Ron Paul on this one, however, this does not take away from all of his many positive accomplishments for the cause of liberty, particularly his two latest ventures in the Ron Paul Channel ( http://www.ronpaulchannel.com/ ) and his new program for home schoolers, The Ron Paul Curriculum ( http://www.ronpaulcurriculum.com/ ).

I was, and still am, very critical of Bob Barr for endorsing Newt Gingrich in the Republican primaries last year, and then for endorsing Mitt Romney in the general election, however, if these were the only things wrong that Barr had done then I’d have been more willing to give him a “pass,” or at the very least say something like, “Well, I don’t agree with Bob Barr here, but look at all of the other good things that he has done.” Bob Barr is nowhere near Ron Paul when it comes to fighting for the cause of liberty. I doubt that Barr was ever really any kind of libertarian or constitutionalist, he was more likely an opportunist or a plant, maybe both.

“Yes, but it is more likely that he does, but that Sarvis did not ask him for an endorsement. ”

I would not automatically assume that Ron Paul knows who Rob Sarvis is. Ron is a busy guy, plus he’s getting up there in age. I doubt that he knows who every minor party and independent candidate is. Most people, even most people who are politically active – including those who are active in minor parties or with independent candidates, do not follow what is going on with minor party and independent candidates around the country. Rob Sarvis is doing relatively well in the race by minor party standards, but he is far from being a household name. Remember, those of us who follow websites like Independent Political Report and Ballot Access News, only represent a very tiny fraction of the population. Heck, I’d bet that there are a lot of Libertarian Party members, especially outside of Virginia, who do not know who Rob Sarvis is. So it is really not a stretch to ask if Ron Paul even knows who Rob Sarvis is. I’m not saying that Ron Paul does not know who he is, I’m just raising the real possibility that he does not know who Sarvis is.

It is also quite possible that Sarvis did not ask Ron Paul for an endorsement, and if so, I’d say that this was a mistake. His campaign should have at least tried to get one,

Speaking of things that the Sarvis campaign should be doing, I asked Rob Sarvis several months ago if he supported jury nullification and he said that he does. I then suggested to him that he ought to make the subject of jury nullification a regular talking point in his campaign, because this is a way that Libertarian Party candidates can be more effective even if they do not get elected, because by informing the general public about the right of jury nullification increases the odds of people not being prosecuted for victimless crimes. Rob Sarvis said that he agreed with me and that this was a good idea. Has he actually implemented it? I am not aware of him talking about jury nullification in any of his interviews, and this is disappointing. He’s gotten a lot of media coverage (relatively speaking, by minor party standards). Just imagine who many people he could have reached with the message of jury nullification by now if he had mentioned it whenever possible in interviews. Jury nullification is something that most Democrats and Republicans will not touch with a ten foot pole, and it is also something that a lot of people agree with when they hear about it (I have informed numerous people about the right of jury nullification, and most people respond favorably after they find out what it is). Jury nullification is an issue that Libertarians could get a lot of support on and it is also something that can prevent a lot of people from going to prison for “crimes” where there is no victim, regardless of whether or not Libertarians get elected to office.

“Sounds like VA C4L needs some different leadership.”

I agree, but so does the Libertarian Party in some places (Nevada comes to mind for one).

I’m generally supportive of Campaign for Liberty, but I do not agree with their Virginia Chair, Donna Holt, endorsing Cuccinelli, and it should be pointed out that her views do not represent the entire organization.

I doubt that he knows who every minor party and independent candidate is.

Rob Sarvis would be more significant than most. And a lot of libertarian organizations are HQed in NoVa, so there’s a lot of buzz about it among people who know Ron Paul well. I don’t think he is unaware that Sarvis is in the race.

so does the Libertarian Party in some places (Nevada comes to mind for one).

” But Paul’s endorsement is meaningless. What did it do for Baldwin? Zilch.”

I would not say that it did zilch. It probably did garner thousands of votes that Baldwin would not have otherwise received. Chuck Baldwin did end up being the Constitution Party’s to vote getter in a Presidential race as he received just shy of 200,000 votes.

The reasons that it did not result in more votes that it did are as follows:

1) The Chuck Baldwin campaign did not have the infrastructure to do much with the endorsement.

2) The Constitution Party did not have ballot access in a lot of states, and by this point it was too late to get ballot access in those places.

3) The endorsement came late, and it only came as the result of an “FU” to the Bob Barr campaign.

Hey Andy and Paulie, may I suggest that you contact Robert Sarvis’s campaign strategist with your questions and concerns about how he’s run Robert’s campaign so far? I met him at one of Sarvis’s meet and greets and he’s a really nice guy. Here’s his contact info:

Donna Holt has been a big Douchinelli backer for years now, as were many of the founding C4L HQ staff (I’ve stopped dealing with C4L, so I don’t know about any current people there). Donna, as I understand it, has been one of the most active and respected C4L state chairs. I would imagine that her opinion carries a fair amount of weight in any RP endorsement within VA.

Douchinelli has managed to make a good number of libertarians, and even some Libertarians, believe that he is a pro-liberty guy. In reality, he is a pretty extreme social conservative, and a moderate on fiscal matters. I can certainly see his appeal to conservative Republicans, but I see nothing about him that should make any kind of libertarian support him.

That’s the big Achilles heel of c4l and most of the organized libertarian movement as a whole. Failure to distinguish between conservatives/Republicans and libertarians. It’s the biggest thing holding us back. The quicker we break that the better off we will be.